Meta

Tony Blair and Christopher Hitchens debated the question of whether religion is a force for good. As anyone who has ever debated Hitchens might tell you, the only way to win a debate with Hitchens is not to play…but as Hitchens would remind you, that ain’t winning. There may be a few with the intellectual capacity, and a handful possessed of sufficient rhetorical style, but no one plays at both ends of the court like Hitch.
As the BBC reports, and as might have been expected, Hitch carried the day by a 2-1 margin. Of course, he did have the advantage of being right.

Saw a bit of the debate. Blair should be writing cloying prose for Hallmark cards. Not only did he clearly lose, he offered no coherent argument. Did the man not understand that Hitch is extremely good at this sort of thing?
What’s next, an arm-wrestling contest with the Atlanta Falcons’ nose guard?

I’m no Blair fan, but I’ve got to give him a certain amount of props. Unlike most so-called “leaders”, he at least has the courtesy/balls to debate his critics on a level playing field and not restrict himself to puffball interviews with friendly media outlets like most do.

Anybody think Dick Cheney would engage in open public debate with a top flight debater perfectly capable of ripping him a new one?